You all can say what you want but it does drop memory usage by 5-10% anytime I have used it

And here is a screen shot of Iolo's system mechanic defrag software for harddrive, vista said no fragmentation, h9owever through command prompt it said I had 5% fragmented, 28% for system mechanic with the deep scan, took less than 1 minute to analyze, and it found 422 additional files that were fragmented.

Hard drives need to be defragmented because their access times are FAR greater than RAM. Even even then, it doesn't make that huge of a difference anymore.

But the real reason here is RAM works differently than mechanical disks. There is no actuator arm, spinning platter or heads... no mechanics at all. Accessing different cells in memory is virtually instantaneous because it is done so through electricity. No amount of defragmenting is going to make a effin' difference with that.

Hard drives need to be defragmented because their access times are FAR greater than RAM. Even even then, it doesn't make that huge of a difference anymore.

But the real reason here is RAM works differently than mechanical disks. There is no actuator arm, spinning platter or heads... no mechanics at all. Accessing different cells in memory is virtually instantaneous because it is done so through electricity. No amount of defragmenting is going to make a effin' difference with that.

Well, i found this article The Memory-Optimization Hoax by Mark Russinovich. Given his reputation and experience i would accept his as an "authoritative" opinion. The full article is copywrited so can't be reprinted here but you can get what he's saying even just from the opening paragraphs